Wallup-Breaux Amendments, Funding, and Restrictions - simplified

Why is this stuff important guys and girls? :huh:
Who really gives a a crap about all this legislative stuff, why do I have to worry about it? :don't know why:

One of the reasons is that this legislation is a key precept to understanding the National or Statewide Saltwater licenses that are being pushed on us.

Most people accept this as a reality that we MUST swallow. I say it's mostly because a lot of anglers won't fight it, so they know they can get away with it. :2flip:

Fine, if licensing actually produces the goals they claim it will. :rolleyes:

Did you ever wonder what were the safeguards to ensure what will happen so the pile of $$ collected doesn't get siphoned to pay off some entirely different state program?

Well, part of it has to do with Wallup Breaux funding and the Wallup Breaux Amendments.

As I said with the Magnusson Stevens Act, I'm running a little lean on the time I have as I get into more Admin responsibilities here.

So, as previously asked, I'm asking for your help in filling in this thread, guys and girls.

Google is your friend... just type in either of the above highlighted terms and you will be inundated with links. But what I'm looking for here is GOOD links and resulting posts, ones that explain this mind-boggling legalese in terms the average person can understand and relate to. :thumbsup:

Thanks for all your help, people! :HappyWave:

The Wallop-Breaux Act (aka the Dingell-Johnson Act) provides Federal monies to the states through the Sport Fishing Restoration account. These funds are distributed to states that pass laws for the conservation of fisheries. These states must also have any fees charged for licensing re-directed into the conservation of fisheries to be eligible for federal funds.

The funds from the Sportfish Restoration Acoount come from a 10% excise tax on all fishing tackle ( in which states are really trying to crack down on with the influx of "custom builders" that are selling their wares without paying). Funds also come from a 3% tax on fishing electronics such as fishfinders and also another tax on motorboats, engines, fuel etc ,to be used for fishing.

This money goes toward boater safety, sportfish restoration
(both fresh and saltwater), boat access and aquatic ecology and education.

The amount of anglers in each state determines 60% of the federal monies each state is allocated. This is another reason for each state that borders saltwater to try and convince as many anglers as possible to sign up for their respective registries or purchase a state saltwater license. The more licensees for fresh and saltwater, the more money the state receives.

There is much more involved that is mostly budgetary but these are some of the major points.

A good link that follows the history of this through the present day is from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Can't always trust the folks who hold the money though. The latest release from stripers forever


8/14/2012
Press Release from Stripers Forever
Over a period of 17 years, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) illegally used more than $3 million in Wallop-Breaux funds to finance a tagging program for the state's commercial striped bass fishery according to Stripers Forever, a conservation organization seeking game fish status for the wild striped bass.
The Wallop-Breaux Act, administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), mandates that funds raised via excise taxes on sporting equipment be used to pay for wildlife and sport fish restoration programs, including the enhancement of recreational fishing opportunities.
An investigation by Ken Hastings, a Maryland-based Stripers Forever board member, found that grant requests and year-end reports submitted to FWS by DNR from 1994 to 2011 did not include any mention of DNR's commercial striper tagging program. The misuse of Wallop-Breaux funds and the cover-up was finally stopped last year by DNR's current management.
"The investigation by Ken Hastings proves that anglers in Maryland unwittingly paid a large portion of the commercial fishermen's regulatory costs for 17 years," says Brad Burns, president of Stripers Forever. "It's also true that the recreational striped bass fishery in Maryland provides more jobs and much greater economic value to the state than the commercial fishery does.
"The striped bass resource has declined dramatically all along the coast over the past six years," Burns adds. "The commercial harvest – both legal and illegal – and overly liberal recreational bag limits both contribute to the problem. We need to make the wild striper a game fish by stopping all commercial harvest. Doing so would allow striped bass to be managed sustainably for anglers from Maine to North Carolina, thus providing the greatest socio-economic value possible to the coastal states from the fishery."
______________
.Ken Hastings' full report can be found at www.stripersforever.org
.For an in-depth review of the Wallop-Breaux Act, go to:
http://www.fws.gov/laws/lawsdigest/fasport.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkSkies

O
Fine, if licensing actually produces the goals they claim it will. :rolleyes:

Did you ever wonder what were the safeguards to ensure what will happen so the pile of $$ collected doesn't get siphoned to pay off some entirely different state program?


So, as previously asked, I'm asking for your help in filling in this thread, guys and girls.

Google is your friend... just type in either of the above highlighted terms and you will be inundated with links. But what I'm looking for here is GOOD links and resulting posts, ones that explain this mind-boggling legalese in terms the average person can understand and relate to. :thumbsup:

Thanks for all your help, people! :HappyWave:

---

Well here is an example of where they misappropriated the funds. Found on SF site.
http://www.stripersforever.org/Info/...oard/I01B10E2D



The following report by SF board member Ken Hastings of Maryland shows how funds raised under the Wallop-Breaux Act through excise taxes on equipment used primarily by hunters and fishermen can be illegally misapplied.

Ken explains that for many years in Maryland, the Wallop-Breaux funds that by law should have been dedicated to enhancing recreational fishing opportunities were instead siphoned off to buy tags for commercial striper/rock fishermen, so they wouldn’t need to pay for the tags themselves.
The current chief of Maryland Fisheries, Thomas O'Connell, in an e-mail to outdoor writer/blogger Gene Mueller, admitted that the Maryland DNR had been using Wallop-Breaux funds for the purchase of commercial striped bass tags since the mid-1990s. O’Connell said that when the illegal practice came to his attention last year, he immediately put an end to it. “I do not believe this is a justifiable use of sport fishermen's equipment excise tax revenues,” O’Connell added.

The way we see it, the recreational fishery for striped bass in Maryland -- which has more jobs and much greater economic value to the state than the commercial fishery -- is being degraded severely by the commercial fishing effort. At the same time, recreational fishermen have unwittingly paid the commercial fishermen’s regulatory costs!

Take a minute and read Ken Hasting’s report below. You will be shocked at the revelations.
_________


Over the past 75 years, more than $14 billion raised via excise taxes levied on equipment used primarily in hunting and fishing has been channeled to wildlife and sport fish restoration efforts in the U.S. The funding mechanism, generally labeled the Wallop-Breaux Act (W-B) and amended and re-authorized over the years, has helped to finance and maintain a great variety of educational and ecological programs for the non-sporting public as well as for hunters and fishermen. *
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is responsible for administering W-B and ensuring that each state satisfies the statutory and regulatory mandates associated with W-B funding, including the requirement that the states submit detailed grant requests annually. Each state must also submit year-end fiscal and progress reports. FWS audits each state every five years to ensure compliance.

In 2012, almost $350 million was earmarked for sport fish restoration across the country. Maryland’s share was $3,497,637, or about one percent of the total.

In 1994, right after the coast-wide striped bass moratorium was lifted, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) decided to use a tagging program to ensure that the commercial striper harvest did not exceed the state’s established quota. Each fish harvested commercially would be tagged at the source. Rather than charge the fishermen for the tags, DNR decided to buy them with W-B funds.

DNR had to know that diverting money earmarked for sport fish restoration to subsidize the striped bass commercial fishery violated both the spirit and the letter of the law. DNR also had to know that this misuse of W-B funds would not go down well with the sportsmen who put up the money in the first place, or with the folks at FWS. So DNR simply did not mention the tagging project in its W-B grant applications.

FWS approved the grant applications and sent the requested funds to DNR. Not surprisingly, the year-end fiscal and progress reports from DNR did not include any mention of the tags

The tag funding cover-up continued unabated in Maryland for 17 years under different administrations and consumed more than $3 million until exposed in 2011. DNR has never conducted an official investigation of its cover-up. Instead, department spin doctors tried to put the blame on the FWS and insisted it was just doing what other Atlantic coastal state fishery managers do – dump W-B money into the department’s “general fund.”


The upshot is that recreational fishermen have been serving as cash cows for a long-running and fraudulent Maryland DNR program. Considering just how easy it was for DNR to hide this illegal action, are W-B funds being similarly diverted to “general funds” in other coastal states?

As recreational striped bass fishermen and benefactors of the resource, we urge you to put the question to your legislators. They represent you and it is their job to respond to your inquiries…


* For a detailed look at the Wallop-Breaux Act, go to http://www.fws.gov/laws/lawsdigest/FASPORT.HTML